Category Archives: Neoconservatism

John McCain issued a jeremiad, just the other day, in which he decried nationalism, or America Firstism, in favor on internationalism and neoconservatism. He had the chutzpah to cloak this decidedly un-American baffle gab in the raiment of constitutionalism—the address was at the behest of the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia. Has the Center read the Constitution? McCain sounds like a French Jacobin, not like an American Founding Father:

“We live in a land made of ideals, not blood and soil,” McCain intoned. “We have a moral obligation to continue in our just cause, and we would bring more than shame on ourselves if we don’t. We will not thrive in a world where our leadership and ideals are absent. We wouldn’t deserve to.”

“Instead of our politics reflecting our values, we’ve got politics infecting our communities. Instead of looking for ways to work together and get things done in a practical way, we’ve got folks who are deliberately trying to make folks angry, to demonize people who have different ideas, to get the base all riled up because it provides a short-term tactical advantage.”

… if you believe in that better vision not just of our politics, but of our common life, of our democracy, of who we are; if you want that reflected in our government, if you want our kids to see our government and feel good about it, and feel like they’re represented and if you want those values that you are teaching your children reinforced … then you’ve got to go out there.”

Then it was George Bush’s turn. More so than Obama did Bush, a Gold Star neoconservative, trash the elemental idea that a government by the people is for THAT PEOPLE ALONE.

We’ve seen nationalism distorted into nativism, [and] forgotten the dynamism that immigration has always brought to America.

Bush’s version of McCain’s propositionalism: “Our identity as a nation, and unlike many other nations, is not determined by geography or ethnicity, by soil or blood. Being an American involves the embrace of high ideals and civic responsibility.”

Contra MSNBC bobble-heads who commented, the successor, President Donald Trump, is not taking the country down a road the internationalists abhor; what remains of The People is trying to take the country back.

The ironically named National Constitution Center in Philadelphia has honored Sen. John McCain who cares not at all for the Constitution. In his acceptance address, the man dishonors voters who voted to be done with advancing John McCain’s ideas around the globe.

That’s how faithful McCain is to the unique constitutional principle of a government by the people, and not a government by a cabal of elites bent on advancing ideas with The People’s blood and treasure. A government by The People, not by one John McCain, is a bedrock of the US Constitution.

McCain on Monday cautioned against the US turning toward “half-baked, spurious nationalism” during an event honoring the war hero’s contributions.
Reflecting on his decades-long political history, McCain warned that to “fear” the world the US has led for the better part of a century, “abandon the ideals we have advanced around the globe” and “refuse the obligations of international leadership … for the sake of some half-baked, spurious nationalism cooked up by people who would rather find scapegoats than solve problems” is unpatriotic.
“As unpatriotic,” he continued, “as an attachment to any other tired dogma of the past that Americans consigned to the ash heap of history.”

'Especially people who care about strangers and social injustice' are so cruel to their own.' Epitomizes neocons and neoliberals; The World before neighbors and friends in need. https://t.co/DCDVYkqP6S

Scott Greer , deputy editor at The Caller, infuriates Establishment Republicans by demolishing Dinesh D’Souza’s idiotic reductionism. Traditionally, D’Souza has blamed Democrats for all bad turns in US history—never mind finer points such as that, for example, the States’ Rights Democratic Party, the Dixiecrats, were not exactly the same Pelosi Democrats we endure today. Ditto the Democratic Party during Reconstruction. Not the same party.

When Strom Thurmond went up against Harry S. Truman and Thomas E. Dewey in 1948, it was about states’ rights. Dixiecrats was the derogatory name the Media Ministry gave to what was really the States Rights Democratic Party.

… As they heap contempt upon Native-American societies—establishment bobble heads, with admirable exceptions, are at the beck and call of African-American interests. Most conservatives agree about the legitimacy of African-Americans’ eternal grievances (“the fault of Democrats,” they intone). The same establishment offers incontinent exhilaration about the greatness of African-American heroes (MLK über alles). And the only argument mustered in these quarters for raising, rather than removing, statues for the South’s heroes is, “We need to preserve our history, horribly flawed with respect to African-Americans, mea culpa.” Or, “Who’s next? Jefferson?”